Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey A. Hutchings


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. (non-admin closure) Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 01:59, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Jeffrey A. Hutchings

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable per WP:PROF. He has done a lot of stuff but not enough to warrant a Wikipedia article (unfortunately, because he has done some good work IMO). The page reads more like a cv than a Wikipedia article. Side issue: this is another article that I have seen come out of the AfC process that needs a lot more work to be presentable i.e. layout per MOS. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. 04:50, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Google Scholar lists 20 papers with over 100 citations each. Even if this field is highly cited that is a clear pass of WP:PROF criterion 1. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:08, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * But is that "significant impact" from "independent sources"? It does tip the scales towards keep but not enough IMO. And I would have thought "independent sources" would be those outside of academia. Also, how many bio articles should we have? Are we in danger of becoming a Whos Who rather than an encyclopaedia? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "Outside academia" is a ludicrous standard, much like requiring sources to be "outside biology" for articles about animal species or "not including professional movie reviewers" for articles about movies. And those 20 papers with 100 citations each give approximately 2000 independent sources. Usually in this context independent is taken as meaning not under the control of the subject or the subject's employer. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. A GS h-index of circa 40 gives a clear pass of WP:Prof. The nominator will find the answers to his questions in WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC).
 * Keep as well as passing criterion 1 of WP:PROF, he also passes criterion 5 (as the holder of a named chair). —David Eppstein (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.